A systematic review of antibody mediated immunity to coronaviruses: kinetics, correlates of protection, and association with severity

Evaluation of commercially available immuno-magnetic agglutination in comparison to enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for rapid point-of-care diagnostics of COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Fast, accurate, and simple blood-based assays for quantification of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are urgently needed to identify infected individuals and keep track of the spread of disease.

METHODS

The study included 33 plasma samples from 20 individuals with confirmed COVID-19 by real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction and 40 non-COVID-19 plasma samples. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin M (IgM)/immunoglobulin A (IgA) or immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were detected by a microfluidic quantitative immunomagnetic assay (IMA) (ViroTrack Sero COVID IgM + IgA/IgG Ab, Blusense Diagnostics) and compared to an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (EuroImmun Medizinische Labordiagnostika).

RESULTS

Of the 33 plasma samples from the COVID-19 patients, 28 were positive for IgA/IgM or IgG by IMA and 29 samples were positive by ELISA. Sensitivity for only one sample per patient was 68% for IgA + IgM and 75% IgG by IMA and 80% by ELISA. For samples collected 14 days after symptom onset, the sensitivity of both IMA and ELISA was around 91%. The specificity of the IMA reached 100% compared to 95% for ELISA IgA and 97.5% for ELISA IgG.

CONCLUSION

IMA for COVID-19 is a rapid simple-to-use point-of-care test with sensitivity and specificity similar to a commercial ELISA.

Back to basics in COVID-19: Antigens and antibodies-Completing the puzzle

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has gathered 1 year of scientific/clinical information. This informational asset should be thoroughly and wisely used in the coming year colliding in a global task force to control this infection. Epidemiology of this infection shows that the available estimates of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence largely depended on the availability of molecular testing and the extent of tested population. Within molecular diagnosis, the viability and infectiousness of the virus in the tested samples should be further investigated. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 has a genetic normal evolution that is a dynamic process. The immune system participates to the counterattack of the viral infection by pathogen elimination, cellular homoeostasis, tissue repair and generation of memory cells that would be reactivated upon a second encounter with the same virus. In all these stages, we still have knowledge to be gathered regarding antibody persistence, protective effects and immunological memory. Moreover, information regarding the intense pro-inflammatory action in severe cases still lacks and this is important in stratifying patients for difficult to treat cases. Without being exhaustive, the review will cover these important issues to be acknowledged to further advance in the battle against the current pandemia.

Comparison of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-Specific Antibodies' Binding Capacity Between Human Milk and Serum from Coronavirus Disease 2019-Recovered Women

Background: Human milk from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-recovered women may be useful as oral antibody therapy to prevent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and provide long-term immunity to neonates and young children. As convalescent plasma is already used as antibody therapy, this study aimed to compare the binding capacity of antibodies specific to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 between human milk and serum from COVID-19-recovered women. Materials and Methods: The areas under the curve (AUCs) for IgA, IgM, and IgG specific to the SARS-CoV-2 RBD in human milk and serum samples were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Milk samples were collected from 12 COVID-19-recovered women, while serum samples were from 10 COVID-19-recovered women. The antibody concentrations were also determined. Results: Our study reveals that SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific antibody titers differed between human milk and serum samples from COVID-19-recovered women. When the AUCs were not divided by the antibody concentration, SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific IgA, IgM, and IgG levels were higher in the serum sample group than the human milk group (p < 0.001). However, the titers of SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific IgM (AUC/μg of IgM) and IgG (AUC/μg of IgG) were higher in human milk samples than serum samples (p < 0.05). The titer of SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific IgA (AUC/mg of IgA) was higher in the serum sample group than the human milk group (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Human milk antibodies specific to the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 must be purified to obtain comparable binding capacity observed with SARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific serum antibodies.

Evaluation of High-Throughput SARS-CoV-2 Serological Assays in a Longitudinal Cohort of Patients with Mild COVID-19: Clinical Sensitivity, Specificity, and Association with Virus Neutralization Test

BACKGROUND

The association between SARS-CoV-2 commercial serological assays and virus neutralization test (VNT) has been poorly explored in mild patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

439 serum specimens were longitudinally collected from 76 healthcare workers with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19. The clinical sensitivity (determined weekly) of 9 commercial serological assays were evaluated. Clinical specificity was assessed using 69 pre-pandemic sera. Correlation, agreement, and concordance with the VNT were also assessed on a subset of 170 samples. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) was estimated at 2 neutralizing antibody titers.

RESULTS

The Wantai Total Ab assay targeting the receptor binding domain (RBD) within the S protein presented the best sensitivity at different times during the course of disease. The clinical specificity was greater than 95% for all tests except for the Euroimmun IgA assay. The overall agreement with the presence of neutralizing antibodies ranged from 62.2% (95%CI; 56.0-68.1) for bioMérieux IgM to 91.2% (87.0-94.2) for Siemens. The lowest negative percent agreement (NPA) was found with the Wantai Total Ab assay (NPA 33% (21.1-48.3)). The NPA for other total Ab or IgG assays targeting the S or the RBD was 80.7% (66.7-89.7), 90.3% (78.1-96.1), and 96.8% (86.8-99.3) for Siemens, bioMérieux IgG, and DiaSorin, respectively. None of the commercial assays have sufficient performance to detect a neutralizing titer of 80 (AUC < 0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Although some assays show a better agreement with VNT than others, the present findings emphasize that commercialized serological tests, including those targeting the RBD, cannot substitute a VNT for the assessment of functional antibody response.

Why is COVID-19 less severe in children? A review of the proposed mechanisms underlying the age-related difference in severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections

In contrast to other respiratory viruses, children have less severe symptoms when infected with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this review, we discuss proposed hypotheses for the age-related difference in severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Factors proposed to explain the difference in severity of COVID-19 in children and adults include those that put adults at higher risk and those that protect children. The former include: (1) age-related increase in endothelial damage and changes in clotting function; (2) higher density, increased affinity and different distribution of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptors and transmembrane serine protease 2; (3) pre-existing coronavirus antibodies (including antibody-dependent enhancement) and T cells; (4) immunosenescence and inflammaging, including the effects of chronic cytomegalovirus infection; (5) a higher prevalence of comorbidities associated with severe COVID-19 and (6) lower levels of vitamin D. Factors that might protect children include: (1) differences in innate and adaptive immunity; (2) more frequent recurrent and concurrent infections; (3) pre-existing immunity to coronaviruses; (4) differences in microbiota; (5) higher levels of melatonin; (6) protective off-target effects of live vaccines and (7) lower intensity of exposure to SARS-CoV-2.

Assessment of S1-, S2-, and NCP-Specific IgM, IgA, and IgG Antibody Kinetics in Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection by a Microarray and Twelve Other Immunoassays

In this study, we comprehensively analyzed multispecific antibody kinetics of different immunoglobulins in hospitalized patients with acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Three hundred fifty-four blood samples longitudinally obtained from 81 IgG-seroconverting progressed coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) patients were quantified for spike 1 (S1), S2, and nucleocapsid protein (NCP)-specific IgM, IgA, IgG, and total Ig antibodies using a microarray, 11 different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs)/chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs), and 1 rapid test by seven manufacturers.

In this study, we comprehensively analyzed multispecific antibody kinetics of different immunoglobulins in hospitalized patients with acute severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Three hundred fifty-four blood samples longitudinally obtained from 81 IgG-seroconverting progressed coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) patients were quantified for spike 1 (S1), S2, and nucleocapsid protein (NCP)-specific IgM, IgA, IgG, and total Ig antibodies using a microarray, 11 different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs)/chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIAs), and 1 rapid test by seven manufacturers. The assays’ specificity was assessed in 130 non-CoVID-19 pneumonia patients. Using the microarray, NCP-specific IgA and IgG antibodies continuously displayed higher detection rates during acute CoVID-19 than S1- and S2-specific ones. S1-specific IgG antibodies, however, reached higher peak values. Until the 26th day post-symptom onset, all patients developed IgG responses against S1, S2, and NCP. Although detection rates by ELISAs/CLIAs generally resembled those of the microarray, corresponding to the target antigen, sensitivities and specificities varied among all tests. Notably, patients with more severe CoVID-19 displayed higher IgG and IgA levels, but this difference was mainly observed with S1-specific immunoassays. In patients with high SARS-CoV-2 levels in the lower respiratory tract, we observed high detection rates of IgG and total Ig immunoassays with a particular rise of S1-specific IgG antibodies when viral concentrations in the tracheal aspirate subsequently declined over time. In summary, our study demonstrates that differences in sensitivity among commercial immunoassays during acute SARS-CoV-2 infection are only partly related to the target antigen. Importantly, our data indicate that NCP-specific IgA and IgG antibodies are detected earlier, while higher S1-specific IgA antibody levels occur in severely ill patients.

Comparison of 16 Serological SARS-CoV-2 Immunoassays in 16 Clinical Laboratories

Serological assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are needed to support clinical diagnosis and epidemiological investigations. Recently, assays for large-scale detection of total antibodies (Ab), immunoglobulin G (IgG), and IgM against SARS-CoV-2 antigens have been developed, but there are limited data on the diagnostic accuracy of these assays. This study was a Danish national collaboration and evaluated 15 commercial and one in-house anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays in 16 laboratories. Sensitivity was evaluated using 150 samples from individuals with asymptomatic, mild, or moderate COVID-19, nonhospitalized or hospitalized, confirmed by nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT); samples were collected 13 to 73 days either from symptom onset or from positive NAAT (patients without symptoms). Specificity and cross-reactivity were evaluated in samples collected prior to the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic from >586 blood donors and patients with autoimmune diseases, cytomegalovirus or Epstein-Barr virus infections, and acute viral infections. A specificity of ≥99% was achieved by all total-Ab and IgG assays except one, DiaSorin Liaison XL IgG (97.2%). Sensitivities in descending order were Wantai ELISA total Ab (96.7%), CUH-NOVO in-house ELISA total Ab (96.0%), Ortho Vitros total Ab (95.3%), YHLO iFlash IgG (94.0%), Ortho Vitros IgG (93.3%), Siemens Atellica total Ab (93.2%), Roche Elecsys total Ab (92.7%), Abbott Architect IgG (90.0%), Abbott Alinity IgG (median 88.0%), DiaSorin Liaison XL IgG (median 84.6%), Siemens Vista total Ab (81.0%), Euroimmun/ELISA IgG (78.0%), and Snibe Maglumi IgG (median 78.0%). However, confidence intervals overlapped for several assays. The IgM results were variable, with the Wantai IgM ELISA showing the highest sensitivity (82.7%) and specificity (99%). The rate of seropositivity increased with time from symptom onset and symptom severity.

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN)

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of whether individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 are protected from future SARS-CoV-2 infection is an urgent requirement. We aimed to investigate whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with a decreased risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection.

METHODS

A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study was done, with participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England. All health-care workers, support staff, and administrative staff working at hospitals who could remain engaged in follow-up for 12 months were eligible to join The SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study. Participants were excluded if they had no PCR tests after enrolment, enrolled after Dec 31, 2020, or had insufficient PCR and antibody data for cohort assignment. Participants attended regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing (every 2-4 weeks) and completed questionnaires every 2 weeks on symptoms and exposures. At enrolment, participants were assigned to either the positive cohort (antibody positive, or previous positive PCR or antibody test) or negative cohort (antibody negative, no previous positive PCR or antibody test). The primary outcome was a reinfection in the positive cohort or a primary infection in the negative cohort, determined by PCR tests. Potential reinfections were clinically reviewed and classified according to case definitions (confirmed, probable, or possible) and symptom-status, depending on the hierarchy of evidence. Primary infections in the negative cohort were defined as a first positive PCR test and seroconversions were excluded when not associated with a positive PCR test. A proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) to compare infection rates in the two cohorts.

FINDINGS

From June 18, 2020, to Dec 31, 2020, 30 625 participants were enrolled into the study. 51 participants withdrew from the study, 4913 were excluded, and 25 661 participants (with linked data on antibody and PCR testing) were included in the analysis. Data were extracted from all sources on Feb 5, 2021, and include data up to and including Jan 11, 2021. 155 infections were detected in the baseline positive cohort of 8278 participants, collectively contributing 2 047 113 person-days of follow-up. This compares with 1704 new PCR positive infections in the negative cohort of 17 383 participants, contributing 2 971 436 person-days of follow-up. The incidence density was 7·6 reinfections per 100 000 person-days in the positive cohort, compared with 57·3 primary infections per 100 000 person-days in the negative cohort, between June, 2020, and January, 2021. The adjusted IRR was 0·159 for all reinfections (95% CI 0·13-0·19) compared with PCR-confirmed primary infections. The median interval between primary infection and reinfection was more than 200 days.

INTERPRETATION

A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.

FUNDING

Department of Health and Social Care of the UK Government, Public Health England, The National Institute for Health Research, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.

SARS-CoV-2 infection rates of antibody-positive compared with antibody-negative health-care workers in England: a large, multicentre, prospective cohort study (SIREN)

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of whether individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 are protected from future SARS-CoV-2 infection is an urgent requirement. We aimed to investigate whether antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were associated with a decreased risk of symptomatic and asymptomatic reinfection.

METHODS

A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study was done, with participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England. All health-care workers, support staff, and administrative staff working at hospitals who could remain engaged in follow-up for 12 months were eligible to join The SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection Evaluation study. Participants were excluded if they had no PCR tests after enrolment, enrolled after Dec 31, 2020, or had insufficient PCR and antibody data for cohort assignment. Participants attended regular SARS-CoV-2 PCR and antibody testing (every 2-4 weeks) and completed questionnaires every 2 weeks on symptoms and exposures. At enrolment, participants were assigned to either the positive cohort (antibody positive, or previous positive PCR or antibody test) or negative cohort (antibody negative, no previous positive PCR or antibody test). The primary outcome was a reinfection in the positive cohort or a primary infection in the negative cohort, determined by PCR tests. Potential reinfections were clinically reviewed and classified according to case definitions (confirmed, probable, or possible) and symptom-status, depending on the hierarchy of evidence. Primary infections in the negative cohort were defined as a first positive PCR test and seroconversions were excluded when not associated with a positive PCR test. A proportional hazards frailty model using a Poisson distribution was used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) to compare infection rates in the two cohorts.

FINDINGS

From June 18, 2020, to Dec 31, 2020, 30 625 participants were enrolled into the study. 51 participants withdrew from the study, 4913 were excluded, and 25 661 participants (with linked data on antibody and PCR testing) were included in the analysis. Data were extracted from all sources on Feb 5, 2021, and include data up to and including Jan 11, 2021. 155 infections were detected in the baseline positive cohort of 8278 participants, collectively contributing 2 047 113 person-days of follow-up. This compares with 1704 new PCR positive infections in the negative cohort of 17 383 participants, contributing 2 971 436 person-days of follow-up. The incidence density was 7·6 reinfections per 100 000 person-days in the positive cohort, compared with 57·3 primary infections per 100 000 person-days in the negative cohort, between June, 2020, and January, 2021. The adjusted IRR was 0·159 for all reinfections (95% CI 0·13-0·19) compared with PCR-confirmed primary infections. The median interval between primary infection and reinfection was more than 200 days.

INTERPRETATION

A previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an 84% lower risk of infection, with median protective effect observed 7 months following primary infection. This time period is the minimum probable effect because seroconversions were not included. This study shows that previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals.

FUNDING

Department of Health and Social Care of the UK Government, Public Health England, The National Institute for Health Research, with contributions from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish governments.

Antibody Responses in COVID-19: A Review

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread worldwide as a severe pandemic. Although its seroprevalence is highly variable among territories, it has been reported at around 10%, but higher in health workers. Evidence regarding cross-neutralizing response between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 is still controversial. However, other previous coronaviruses may interfere with SARS-CoV-2 infection, since they are phylogenetically related and share the same target receptor. Further, the seroconversion of IgM and IgG occurs at around 12 days post onset of symptoms and most patients have neutralizing titers on days 14-20, with great titer variability. Neutralizing antibodies correlate positively with age, male sex, and severity of the disease. Moreover, the use of convalescent plasma has shown controversial results in terms of safety and efficacy, and due to the variable immune response among individuals, measuring antibody titers before transfusion is mostly required. Similarly, cellular immunity seems to be crucial in the resolution of the infection, as SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells circulate to some extent in recovered patients. Of note, the duration of the antibody response has not been well established yet.

Durable SARS-CoV-2 B cell immunity after mild or severe disease

Multiple studies have shown loss of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific (SARS-CoV-2-specific) antibodies over time after infection, raising concern that humoral immunity against the virus is not durable. If immunity wanes quickly, millions of people may be at risk for reinfection after recovery from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, memory B cells (MBCs) could provide durable humoral immunity even if serum neutralizing antibody titers decline. We performed multidimensional flow cytometric analysis of S protein receptor binding domain-specific (S-RBD-specific) MBCs in cohorts of ambulatory patients with COVID-19 with mild disease (n = 7), and hospitalized patients with moderate to severe disease (n = 7), at a median of 54 days (range, 39-104 days) after symptom onset. We detected S-RBD-specific class-switched MBCs in 13 of 14 participants, failing only in the individual with the lowest plasma levels of anti-S-RBD IgG and neutralizing antibodies. Resting MBCs (rMBCs) made up the largest proportion of S-RBD-specific MBCs in both cohorts. FCRL5, a marker of functional memory on rMBCs, was more dramatically upregulated on S-RBD-specific rMBCs after mild infection than after severe infection. These data indicate that most SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals develop S-RBD-specific, class-switched rMBCs that resemble germinal center-derived B cells induced by effective vaccination against other pathogens, providing evidence for durable B cell-mediated immunity against SARS-CoV-2 after mild or severe disease.

Coronavirus disease 2019 and the revival of passive immunization: Antibody therapy for inhibiting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and preventing host cell infection: IUPHAR review: 31

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic stimulated both the scientific community and healthcare companies to undertake an unprecedented effort with the aim of understanding the molecular mechanisms of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and developing effective therapeutic solutions. The peculiar immune response triggered by this virus, which seems to last only few months, led to a search for alternatives such as passive immunization in addition to conventional vaccinations. Convalescent sera, monoclonal antibodies selected from the most potent neutralizing binders induced by the virus infection, recombinant human single-domain antibodies, and binders of variable scaffold and different origin have been tested alone or in combination exploiting monovalent, multivalent and multispecific formats. In this review, we analyse the state of the research in this field and present a summary of the ongoing projects finalized to identify suitable molecules for therapies based on passive immunization.

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence: experiences of a tertiary eye centre

INTRODUCTION

The actual prevalence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection and the individual assessment of being or having been infected may differ. Facing the great uncertainty-especially at the beginning of the pandemic-and the possibility of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, subclinical infections, we evaluate the experience of SARS-CoV-2 antibody screening at a tertiary clinical setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

All employees of a tertiary eye centre and a research institute of ophthalmology were offered antibody testing in May 2020, using a sequential combination of different validated assays/antigens and point-of-care (POC) testing for a subset (NCT04446338). Before taking blood, a systematic inquiry into past symptoms, known contacts and a subjective self-assessment was documented. The correlations between serostatus, patient contacts and demographic characteristics were analysed. Different tests were compared by Kappa statistics.

RESULTS

Among 318 participants, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 9 employees. Chemiluminescence assays (chemiluminescence immunoassay and electrochemiluminescence) showed superior specificity and high reproducibility, compared with ELISA and POC results.In contrast to the low seropositivity (2.8%) of healthcare workers, higher than that of the other departments of the hospital, a large proportion mistakenly assumed that they might have already been infected. Antiviral antibody titres increased and remained on a plateau for at least 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The great demand and acceptance confirmed the benefit of highly sensitive testing methods in the early phase of the pandemic. The coincidence of low seroprevalence and anxious employees may have contributed to internalising the need of hygiene measures.

COVID-19 Vaccines: Current Understanding on Immunogenicity, Safety, and Further Considerations

The world has entered the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its intensity is significantly higher than that of the first wave of early 2020. Many countries or regions have been forced to start the second round of lockdowns. To respond rapidly to this global pandemic, dozens of COVID-19 vaccine candidates have been developed and many are undergoing clinical testing. Evaluating and defining effective vaccine candidates for human use is crucial for prioritizing vaccination programs against COVID-19. In this review, we have summarized and analyzed the efficacy, immunogenicity and safety data from clinical reports on different COVID-19 vaccines. We discuss the various guidelines laid out for the development of vaccines and the importance of biological standards for comparing the performance of vaccines. Lastly, we highlight the key remaining challenges, possible strategies for addressing them and the expected improvements in the next generation of COVID-19 vaccines.

IL-33 expression in response to SARS-CoV-2 correlates with seropositivity in COVID-19 convalescent individuals

Our understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is still developing. We perform an observational study to investigate seroprevalence and immune responses in subjects professionally exposed to SARS-CoV-2 and their family members (155 individuals; ages 5-79 years). Seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 Spike glycoprotein aligns with PCR results that confirm the previous infection. Anti-Spike IgG/IgM titers remain high 60 days post-infection and do not strongly associate with symptoms, except for fever. We analyze PBMCs from a subset of seropositive and seronegative adults. TLR7 agonist-activation reveals an increased population of IL-6⁺TNF^-IL-1β⁺ monocytes, while SARS-CoV-2 peptide stimulation elicits IL-33, IL-6, IFNa2, and IL-23 expression in seropositive individuals. IL-33 correlates with CD4⁺ T cell activation in PBMCs from convalescent subjects and is likely due to T cell-mediated effects on IL-33-producing cells. IL-33 is associated with pulmonary infection and chronic diseases like asthma and COPD, but its role in COVID-19 is unknown. Analysis of published scRNAseq data of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) from patients with mild to severe COVID-19 reveals a population of IL-33-producing cells that increases with the disease. Together these findings show that IL-33 production is linked to SARS-CoV-2 infection and warrant further investigation of IL-33 in COVID-19 pathogenesis and immunity.

Seroprevalence and correlates of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies from a population-based study in Bonn, Germany

To estimate the seroprevalence and temporal course of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies, we embedded a multi-tiered seroprevalence survey within an ongoing community-based cohort study in Bonn, Germany. We first assessed anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G levels with an immunoassay, followed by confirmatory testing of borderline and positive test results with a recombinant spike-based immunofluorescence assay and a plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT). Those with a borderline or positive immunoassay result were retested after 4 to 5 months. At baseline, 4771 persons participated (88% response rate). Between April 24th and June 30th, 2020, seroprevalence was 0.97% (95% CI: 0.72-1.30) by immunoassay and 0.36% (95% CI: 0.21-0.61) when considering only those with two additional positive confirmatory tests. Importantly, about 20% of PRNT+ individuals lost their neutralizing antibodies within five months. Here, we show that neutralizing antibodies are detectable in only one third of those with a positive immunoassay result, and wane relatively quickly.

Convalescent plasma treatment of critically ill intensive care COVID-19 patients

Background

Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) may be life‐threatening, and specific antiviral drugs are currently not available. However, first studies indicated that convalescent plasma treatment might improve the clinical outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients.

Study Design and Methods

In the current study, we investigated the efficacy of convalescent plasma treatment in eight COVID‐19 patients. All the patients were critically ill, and seven of them were SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA–positive when starting treatment. SARS‐CoV‐2–specific antibodies were determined by an enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay detecting immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies against the S1 protein (Euroimmun), and the neutralizing titers were determined with a cell‐culture‐based neutralization assay. Plasma treatment started between 4 and 23 days after the onset of symptoms. The patients were usually treated by three plasma units, each containing 200–280 ml, which was applied at day 1, 3, and 5.

Results

Donor sera had on average lower IgG antibody ratios and neutralizing titers than the COVID‐19 patients before the onset of treatment (median ratio of 5.8 and neutralizing titer of 1:320 vs. 7.5 and 1:640, respectively). Nevertheless, we observed an increase of antibody ratios in seven and of neutralizing titers in five patients after treatment; which did, however, not correlate with patient survival. Plasma treatment was effective in three patients, but five deceased despite treatment. Patients who deceased had a later treatment onset than survivors and finally died from multiple organ failure.

Conclusion

Our data indicate that the efficacy of convalescent plasma treatment of critically ill COVID‐19 patients who already had developed strong antiviral immune responses and organ complications is limited.

Self-sampling of capillary blood for SARS-CoV-2 serology

Serological testing is emerging as a powerful tool to progress our understanding of COVID-19 exposure, transmission and immune response. Large-scale testing is limited by the need for in-person blood collection by staff trained in venepuncture, and the limited sensitivity of lateral flow tests. Capillary blood self-sampling and postage to laboratories for analysis could provide a reliable alternative. Two-hundred and nine matched venous and capillary blood samples were obtained from thirty nine participants and analysed using a COVID-19 IgG ELISA to detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Thirty eight out of thirty nine participants were able to self-collect an adequate sample of capillary blood (≥ 50 µl). Using plasma from venous blood collected in lithium heparin as the reference standard, matched capillary blood samples, collected in lithium heparin-treated tubes and on filter paper as dried blood spots, achieved a Cohen’s kappa coefficient of > 0.88 (near-perfect agreement, 95% CI 0.738–1.000). Storage of capillary blood at room temperature for up to 7 days post sampling did not affect concordance. Our results indicate that capillary blood self-sampling is a reliable and feasible alternative to venepuncture for serological assessment in COVID-19.

Seasonal human coronavirus antibodies are boosted upon SARS-CoV-2 infection but not associated with protection

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly spread within the human population. Although SARS-CoV-2 is a novel coronavirus, most humans had been previously exposed to other antigenically distinct common seasonal human coronaviruses (hCoVs) before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Here, we quantified levels of SARS-CoV-2-reactive antibodies and hCoV-reactive antibodies in serum samples collected from 431 humans before the COVID-19 pandemic. We then quantified pre-pandemic antibody levels in serum from a separate cohort of 251 individuals who became PCR-confirmed infected with SARS-CoV-2. Finally, we longitudinally measured hCoV and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the serum of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Our studies indicate that most individuals possessed hCoV-reactive antibodies before the COVID-19 pandemic. We determined that ∼20% of these individuals possessed non-neutralizing antibodies that cross-reacted with SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid proteins. These antibodies were not associated with protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections or hospitalizations, but they were boosted upon SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Biological characteristics and biomarkers of novel SARS-CoV-2 facilitated rapid development and implementation of diagnostic tools and surveillance measures

Existing coronavirus named as a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has speeded its spread across the globe immediately after emergence in China, Wuhan region, at the end of the year 2019. Different techniques, including genome sequencing, structural feature classification by electron microscopy, and chest imaging using computed tomography, are primarily used to diagnose and screen SARS-CoV-2 suspected individuals. Determination of the viral structure, surface proteins, and genome sequence has provided a design blueprint for the diagnostic investigations of novel SARS-CoV-2 virus and rapidly emerging diagnostic technologies, vaccine trials, and cell-entry-inhibiting drugs. Here, we describe recent understandings on the spike glycoprotein (S protein), receptor-binding domain (RBD), and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and their receptor complex. This report also aims to review recently established diagnostic technologies and developments in surveillance measures for SARS-CoV-2 as well as the characteristics and performance of emerging techniques. Smartphone apps for contact tracing can help nations to conduct surveillance measures before a vaccine and effective medicines become available. We also describe promising point-of-care (POC) diagnostic technologies that are under consideration by researchers for advancement beyond the proof-of-concept stage. Developing novel diagnostic techniques needs to be facilitated to establish automatic systems, without any personal involvement or arrangement to curb an existing SARS-CoV-2 epidemic crisis, and could also be appropriate for avoiding the emergence of a future epidemic crisis.

Estimated SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in the US as of September 2020

IMPORTANCE

Case-based surveillance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection likely underestimates the true prevalence of infections. Large-scale seroprevalence surveys can better estimate infection across many geographic regions.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of persons with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using residual sera from commercial laboratories across the US and assess changes over time.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This repeated, cross-sectional study conducted across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico used a convenience sample of residual serum specimens provided by persons of all ages that were originally submitted for routine screening or clinical management from 2 private clinical commercial laboratories. Samples were obtained during 4 collection periods: July 27 to August 13, August 10 to August 27, August 24 to September 10, and September 7 to September 24, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Infection with SARS-CoV-2.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The proportion of persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 as measured by the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 by 1 of 3 chemiluminescent immunoassays. Iterative poststratification was used to adjust seroprevalence estimates to the demographic profile and urbanicity of each jurisdiction. Seroprevalence was estimated by jurisdiction, sex, age group (0-17, 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years), and metropolitan/nonmetropolitan status.

RESULTS

Of 177 919 serum samples tested, 103 771 (58.3%) were from women, 26 716 (15.0%) from persons 17 years or younger, 47 513 (26.7%) from persons 65 years or older, and 26 290 (14.8%) from individuals living in nonmetropolitan areas. Jurisdiction-level seroprevalence over 4 collection periods ranged from less than 1% to 23%. In 42 of 49 jurisdictions with sufficient samples to estimate seroprevalence across all periods, fewer than 10% of people had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence estimates varied between sexes, across age groups, and between metropolitan/nonmetropolitan areas. Changes from period 1 to 4 were less than 7 percentage points in all jurisdictions and varied across sites.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cross-sectional study found that as of September 2020, most persons in the US did not have serologic evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, although prevalence varied widely by jurisdiction. Biweekly nationwide testing of commercial clinical laboratory sera can play an important role in helping track the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the US.

Landscape of humoral immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19 disease and the value of antibody testing

A new pandemic is ongoing in several parts of the world. The agent responsible is the newly emerged severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). The symptoms associated with this virus are known as the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In this review, we summarize the published data on virus specific antibodies in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 disease, patients recovered from the disease and the individuals who are asymptomatic with SARS-CoV-2 infections. The review highlights the following: i) an adjunct role of antibody tests in the diagnosis of COVID-19 in combination with RT-PCR; ii) status of antibodies from COVID-19 convalescent patients to select donors for plasma therapy; iii) the potential confounding effects of other coronaviruses, measles, mumps and rubella in antibody testing due to homology of certain viral genes; and iv) the role of antibody testing for conducting surveillance in populations, incidence estimation, contact tracing and epidemiologic studies.

Convalescent plasma and hyperimmune globulin therapy in COVID-19

Introduction: Severe acute respiratory syndrome causing coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)) has recently resulted in the recent global pandemic. As convalescent plasma (CP) therapy has been used with success in several viral infections before, it has become a treatment of choice. Medical literature is reviewed for randomized controlled studies using convalescent plasma therapy.Areas covered: More than one type of neutralizing antibody against a specific microorganism may be found in both CP and hyperimmune globulins. To give a standard titer of a specific neutralizing antibody to a patient, a reliable antibody titration assay should be developed. It is challenging to test the efficacy of the CP and HIG therapies with double-blind studies. There is a difficulty in the standardization of the CP and HIG study groups, as patients use various additional therapies. Different amounts and titers of CP and HIG and different titers of CP are used in patients. This review discusses the current knowledge on CP and HIG therapies used in COVID-19 disease.Expert opinion: The immune response to COVID-19 have diverse characteristics. The antibody produced after COVID-19 disease and vaccination is short-lived. Thus, CP should be an alternative especially in patients with lymphopenia and primary/secondary antibody deficiency.

Coronavirus 2019 Infectious Disease Epidemic: Where We Are, What Can Be Done and Hope For

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spreads mainly by means of aerosols (microdroplets) in enclosed environments, especially those in which temperature and humidity are regulated by means of air-conditioning. About 30% of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease. Among them, approximately 25% require hospitalization. In medicine, cases are identified as those who become ill. During this pandemic, cases have been identified as those with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test, including approximately 70% who were asymptomatic-this has caused unnecessary anxiety. Individuals more than 65 years old, those affected by obesity, diabetes, asthma, or are immune-depressed owing to cancer and other conditions, are at a higher risk of hospitalization and of dying of COVID-19. Healthy individuals younger than 40 years very rarely die of COVID-19. Estimates of the COVID-19 mortality rate vary because the definition of COVID-19-related deaths varies. Belgium has the highest death rate at 154.9 per 100,000 persons, because it includes anyone who died with symptoms compatible with COVID-19, even those never tested for SARS-CoV-2. The United States includes all patients who died with a positive test, whether they died because of, or with, SARS-CoV-2. Countries that include only patients in which COVID-19 was the main cause of death, rather than a cofactor, have lower death rates. Numerous therapies are being developed, and rapid improvements are anticipated. Because of disinformation, only approximately 50% of the U.S. population plans to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. By sharing accurate information, physicians, health professionals, and scientists play a key role in addressing myths and anxiety, help public health officials enact measures to decrease infections, and provide the best care for those who become sick. In this article, we discuss these issues.

Prior infection by seasonal coronaviruses, as assessed by serology, does not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease in children, France, April to June 2020

BackgroundChildren have a low rate of COVID-19 and secondary severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS) but present a high prevalence of symptomatic seasonal coronavirus infections.AimWe tested if prior infections by seasonal coronaviruses (HCoV) NL63, HKU1, 229E or OC43 as assessed by serology, provide cross-protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection.MethodsWe set a cross-sectional observational multicentric study in pauci- or asymptomatic children hospitalised in Paris during the first wave for reasons other than COVID (hospitalised children (HOS), n = 739) plus children presenting with MIS (n = 36). SARS-CoV-2 antibodies directed against the nucleoprotein (N) and S1 and S2 domains of the spike (S) proteins were monitored by an in-house luciferase immunoprecipitation system assay. We randomly selected 69 SARS-CoV-2-seropositive patients (including 15 with MIS) and 115 matched SARS-CoV-2-seronegative patients (controls (CTL)). We measured antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV as evidence for prior corresponding infections and assessed if SARS-CoV-2 prevalence of infection and levels of antibody responses were shaped by prior seasonal coronavirus infections.ResultsPrevalence of HCoV infections were similar in HOS, MIS and CTL groups. Antibody levels against HCoV were not significantly different in the three groups and were not related to the level of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the HOS and MIS groups. SARS-CoV-2 antibody profiles were different between HOS and MIS children.ConclusionPrior infection by seasonal coronaviruses, as assessed by serology, does not interfere with SARS-CoV-2 infection and related MIS in children.

SARS-CoV-2 Antigens Expressed in Plants Detect Antibody Responses in COVID-19 Patients

Background: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has swept the world and poses a significant global threat to lives and livelihoods, with 115 million confirmed cases and at least 2.5 million deaths from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the first year of the pandemic. Developing tools to measure seroprevalence and understand protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is a priority. We aimed to develop a serological assay using plant-derived recombinant viral proteins, which represent important tools in less-resourced settings. Methods: We established an indirect ELISA using the S1 and receptor-binding domain (RBD) portions of the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2, expressed in Nicotiana benthamiana. We measured antibody responses in sera from South African patients (n = 77) who had tested positive by PCR for SARS-CoV-2. Samples were taken a median of 6 weeks after the diagnosis, and the majority of participants had mild and moderate COVID-19 disease. In addition, we tested the reactivity of pre-pandemic plasma (n = 58) and compared the performance of our in-house ELISA with a commercial assay. We also determined whether our assay could detect SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgA in saliva. Results: We demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobulins are readily detectable using recombinant plant-derived viral proteins, in patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. Reactivity to S1 and RBD was detected in 51 (66%) and 48 (62%) of participants, respectively. Notably, we detected 100% of samples identified as having S1-specific antibodies by a validated, high sensitivity commercial ELISA, and optical density (OD) values were strongly and significantly correlated between the two assays. For the pre-pandemic plasma, 1/58 (1.7%) of samples were positive, indicating a high specificity for SARS-CoV-2 in our ELISA. SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG correlated significantly with IgA and IgM responses. Endpoint titers of S1- and RBD-specific immunoglobulins ranged from 1:50 to 1:3,200. S1-specific IgG and IgA were found in saliva samples from convalescent volunteers. Conclusion: We demonstrate that recombinant SARS-CoV-2 proteins produced in plants enable robust detection of SARS-CoV-2 humoral responses. This assay can be used for seroepidemiological studies and to measure the strength and durability of antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in infected patients in our setting.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Health Care Workers in a Tertiary Hospital in Turkey

INTRODUCTION

Several vaccines have been developed and approved for use against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2; however, the use of personal protective equipment remains important owing to the lack of effective specific treatment and whole community immunity. Hydroxychloroquine sulfate was a treatment option in the early days of the pandemic; however, it was subsequently removed owing to a lack of evidence as an effective treatment. We aimed to evaluate the testing and infection characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 among health care personnel and determine the effectiveness of prophylactic hydroxychloroquine sulfate use to prevent transmission.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study was conducted between May 1 and September 30, 2020. The health care personnel included in the study were physicians, nurses, and paraprofessional support personnel. The health records of health care personnel who had been tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 using polymerase chain reaction were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 508 health care personnel were included in the study. A total of 152 (29.9%) health care personnel were diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019. The positive polymerase chain reaction rate was 80.3% (n = 122). A comparison of infected and uninfected health care personnel showed a difference in age and occupation and no difference in sex, working area, and prophylactic hydroxychloroquine sulfate use.

DISCUSSION

Protective measures in low-risk areas of our hospital require improvements. All health care personnel should be trained on personal protective equipment use. There was no evidence to support the effectiveness of prophylactic hydroxychloroquine sulfate against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 transmission.

Assessment of protection against reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 among 4 million PCR-tested individuals in Denmark in 2020: a population-level observational study

BACKGROUND

The degree to which infection with SARS-CoV-2 confers protection towards subsequent reinfection is not well described. In 2020, as part of Denmark's extensive, free-of-charge PCR-testing strategy, approximately 4 million individuals (69% of the population) underwent 10·6 million tests. Using these national PCR-test data from 2020, we estimated protection towards repeat infection with SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

In this population-level observational study, we collected individual-level data on patients who had been tested in Denmark in 2020 from the Danish Microbiology Database and analysed infection rates during the second surge of the COVID-19 epidemic, from Sept 1 to Dec 31, 2020, by comparison of infection rates between individuals with positive and negative PCR tests during the first surge (March to May, 2020). For the main analysis, we excluded people who tested positive for the first time between the two surges and those who died before the second surge. We did an alternative cohort analysis, in which we compared infection rates throughout the year between those with and without a previous confirmed infection at least 3 months earlier, irrespective of date. We also investigated whether differences were found by age group, sex, and time since infection in the alternative cohort analysis. We calculated rate ratios (RRs) adjusted for potential confounders and estimated protection against repeat infection as 1 - RR.

FINDINGS

During the first surge (ie, before June, 2020), 533 381 people were tested, of whom 11 727 (2·20%) were PCR positive, and 525 339 were eligible for follow-up in the second surge, of whom 11 068 (2·11%) had tested positive during the first surge. Among eligible PCR-positive individuals from the first surge of the epidemic, 72 (0·65% [95% CI 0·51-0·82]) tested positive again during the second surge compared with 16 819 (3·27% [3·22-3·32]) of 514 271 who tested negative during the first surge (adjusted RR 0·195 [95% CI 0·155-0·246]). Protection against repeat infection was 80·5% (95% CI 75·4-84·5). The alternative cohort analysis gave similar estimates (adjusted RR 0·212 [0·179-0·251], estimated protection 78·8% [74·9-82·1]). In the alternative cohort analysis, among those aged 65 years and older, observed protection against repeat infection was 47·1% (95% CI 24·7-62·8). We found no difference in estimated protection against repeat infection by sex (male 78·4% [72·1-83·2] vs female 79·1% [73·9-83·3]) or evidence of waning protection over time (3-6 months of follow-up 79·3% [74·4-83·3] vs ≥7 months of follow-up 77·7% [70·9-82·9]).

INTERPRETATION

Our findings could inform decisions on which groups should be vaccinated and advocate for vaccination of previously infected individuals because natural protection, especially among older people, cannot be relied on.

FUNDING

None.

Femtomolar SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Using the Microbubbling Digital Assay with Smartphone Readout Enables Antigen Burden Quantitation and Dynamics Tracking

Background

Little is known about the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 antigen burden in respiratory samples in different patient populations at different stages of infection. Current rapid antigen tests cannot quantitate and track antigen dynamics with high sensitivity and specificity in respiratory samples.

Methods

We developed and validated an ultra-sensitive SARS-CoV-2 antigen assay with smartphone readout using the Microbubbling Digital Assay previously developed by our group, which is a platform that enables highly sensitive detection and quantitation of protein biomarkers. A computer vision-based algorithm was developed for microbubble smartphone image recognition and quantitation. A machine learning-based classifier was developed to classify the smartphone images based on detected microbubbles. Using this assay, we tracked antigen dynamics in serial swab samples from COVID patients hospitalized in ICU and immunocompromised COVID patients.

Results

The limit of detection (LOD) of the Microbubbling SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay was 0.5 pg/mL (10.6 fM) recombinant nucleocapsid (N) antigen or 4000 copies/mL inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus in nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs, comparable to many rRT-PCR methods. The assay had high analytical specificity towards SARS-CoV-2. Compared to EUA-approved rRT-PCR methods, the Microbubbling Antigen Assay demonstrated a positive percent agreement (PPA) of 97% (95% confidence interval (CI), 92-99%) in symptomatic individuals within 7 days of symptom onset and positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid results, and a negative percent agreement (NPA) of 97% (95% CI, 94-100%) in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals with negative nucleic acid results. Antigen positivity rate in NP swabs gradually decreased as days-after-symptom-onset increased, despite persistent nucleic acid positivity of the same samples. The computer vision and machine learning-based automatic microbubble image classifier could accurately identify positives and negatives, based on microbubble counts and sizes. Total microbubble volume, a potential marker of antigen burden, correlated inversely with Ct values and days-after-symptom-onset. Antigen was detected for longer periods of time in immunocompromised patients with hematologic malignancies, compared to immunocompetent individuals. Simultaneous detectable antigens and nucleic acids may indicate the presence of replicating viruses in patients with persistent infections.

Conclusions

The Microbubbling SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Assay enables sensitive and specific detection of acute infections, and quantitation and tracking of antigen dynamics in different patient populations at various stages of infection. With smartphone compatibility and automated image processing, the assay is well-positioned to be adapted for point-of-care diagnosis and to explore the clinical implications of antigen dynamics in future studies.

Magnetic Bead-Based Immunoassay Allows Rapid, Inexpensive, and Quantitative Detection of Human SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies

Immunological methods to detect SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in humans are important to track COVID-19 cases and the humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 infections and immunization to future vaccines. The aim of this work was to develop a simple chromogenic magnetic bead-based immunoassay which allows rapid, inexpensive, and quantitative detection of human antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in serum, plasma, or blood. Recombinant 6xHis-tagged SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid protein was mobilized on the surface of Ni2+ magnetic beads and challenged with serum or blood samples obtained from controls or COVID-19 cases. The beads were washed, incubated with anti-human IgG-HPR conjugate, and immersed into a solution containing a chromogenic HPR substrate. Bead transfer and homogenization between solutions was aided by a simple low-cost device. The method was validated by two independent laboratories, and the performance to detect SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion in humans was in the same range as obtained using the gold standard immunoassays ELISA and Luminex, though requiring only a fraction of consumables, instrumentation, time to deliver results, and volume of sample. Furthermore, the results obtained with the method described can be visually interpreted without compromising accuracy as demonstrated by validation at a point-of-care unit. The magnetic bead immunoassay throughput can be customized on demand and is readily adapted to be used with any other 6xHis tagged protein or peptide as antigen to track other diseases.

Bovine Coronavirus Immune Milk Against COVID-19

After a year of evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic, there is still no specific effective treatment for the disease. Although the majority of infected people experience mild disease, some patients develop a serious disease, especially when other pathologies concur. For this reason, it would be very convenient to find pharmacological and immunological mechanisms that help control SARS-CoV-2 infection. Since the COVID-19 and BCoV viruses are very close phylogenetically, different studies demonstrate the existence of cross-immunity as they retain shared epitopes in their structure. As a possible control measure against COVID-19, we propose the use of cow's milk immune to BCoV. Thus, the antigenic recognition of some highly conserved structures of viral proteins, particularly M and S2, by anti-BCoV antibodies present in milk would cause a total or partial inactivation of SARS-COV-2 (acting as a particular vaccine) and be addressed more easily by GALT's highly specialized antigen-presenting cells, thus helping the specific immune response.

Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 neutralising antibody responses and duration of immunity: a longitudinal study

Background

Studies have found different waning rates of neutralising antibodies compared with binding antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. The impact of neutralising antibody waning rate at the individual patient level on the longevity of immunity remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the peak levels and dynamics of neutralising antibody waning and IgG avidity maturation over time, and correlate this with clinical parameters, cytokines, and T-cell responses.

Methods

We did a longitudinal study of patients who had recovered from COVID-19 up to day 180 post-symptom onset by monitoring changes in neutralising antibody levels using a previously validated surrogate virus neutralisation test. Changes in antibody avidities and other immune markers at different convalescent stages were determined and correlated with clinical features. Using a machine learning algorithm, temporal change in neutralising antibody levels was classified into five groups and used to predict the longevity of neutralising antibody-mediated immunity.

Findings

We approached 517 patients for participation in the study, of whom 288 consented for outpatient follow-up and collection of serial blood samples. 164 patients were followed up and had adequate blood samples collected for analysis, with a total of 546 serum samples collected, including 128 blood samples taken up to 180 days post-symptom onset. We identified five distinctive patterns of neutralising antibody dynamics as follows: negative, individuals who did not, at our intervals of sampling, develop neutralising antibodies at the 30% inhibition level (19 [12%] of 164 patients); rapid waning, individuals who had varying levels of neutralising antibodies from around 20 days after symptom onset, but seroreverted in less than 180 days (44 [27%] of 164 patients); slow waning, individuals who remained neutralising antibody-positive at 180 days post-symptom onset (46 [28%] of 164 patients); persistent, although with varying peak neutralising antibody levels, these individuals had minimal neutralising antibody decay (52 [32%] of 164 patients); and delayed response, a small group that showed an unexpected increase of neutralising antibodies during late convalescence (at 90 or 180 days after symptom onset; three [2%] of 164 patients). Persistence of neutralising antibodies was associated with disease severity and sustained level of pro-inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors. By contrast, T-cell responses were similar among the different neutralising antibody dynamics groups. On the basis of the different decay dynamics, we established a prediction algorithm that revealed a wide range of neutralising antibody longevity, varying from around 40 days to many decades.

Interpretation

Neutralising antibody response dynamics in patients who have recovered from COVID-19 vary greatly, and prediction of immune longevity can only be accurately determined at the individual level. Our findings emphasise the importance of public health and social measures in the ongoing pandemic outbreak response, and might have implications for longevity of immunity after vaccination.

Funding

National Medical Research Council, Biomedical Research Council, and A*STAR, Singapore.

A homogeneous split-luciferase assay for rapid and sensitive detection of anti-SARS CoV-2 antibodies

Better diagnostic tools are needed to combat the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Here, to meet this urgent demand, we report a homogeneous immunoassay to detect IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. This serological assay, called SATiN, is based on a tri-part Nanoluciferase (tNLuc) approach, in which the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and protein G, fused respectively to two different tNLuc tags, are used as antibody probes. Target engagement of the probes allows reconstitution of a functional luciferase in the presence of the third tNLuc component. The assay is performed directly in the liquid phase of patient sera and enables rapid, quantitative and low-cost detection. We show that SATiN has a similar sensitivity to ELISA, and its readouts are consistent with various neutralizing antibody assays. This proof-of-principle study suggests potential applications in diagnostics, as well as disease and vaccination management.

Endogenously Produced SARS-CoV-2 Specific IgG Antibodies May Have a Limited Impact on Clearing Nasal Shedding of Virus during Primary Infection in Humans

While SARS-CoV-2 specific neutralizing antibodies have been developed for therapeutic purposes, the specific viral triggers that drive the generation of SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG and IgM antibodies remain only partially characterized. Moreover, it is unknown whether endogenously derived antibodies drive viral clearance that might result in mitigation of clinical severity during natural infection. We developed a series of non-linear mathematical models to investigate whether SARS-CoV-2 viral and antibody kinetics are coupled or governed by separate processes. Patients with severe disease had a higher production rate of IgG but not IgM antibodies. Maximal levels of both isotypes were governed by their production rate rather than different saturation levels between people. Our results suggest that an exponential surge in IgG levels occurs approximately 5-10 days after symptom onset with no requirement for continual antigenic stimulation. SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies appear to have limited to no effect on viral dynamics but may enhance viral clearance late during primary infection resulting from the binding effect of antibody to virus, rather than neutralization. In conclusion, SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG antibodies may play only a limited role in clearing infection from the nasal passages despite providing long-term immunity against infection following vaccination or prior infection.

Seroprevalence and humoral immune durability of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Wuhan, China: a longitudinal, population-level, cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Wuhan was the epicentre of the COVID-19 outbreak in China. We aimed to determine the seroprevalence and kinetics of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at population level in Wuhan to inform the development of vaccination strategies.

METHODS

In this longitudinal cross-sectional study, we used a multistage, population-stratified, cluster random sampling method to systematically select 100 communities from the 13 districts of Wuhan. Households were systematically selected from each community and all family members were invited to community health-care centres to participate. Eligible individuals were those who had lived in Wuhan for at least 14 days since Dec 1, 2019. All eligible participants who consented to participate completed a standardised electronic questionnaire of demographic and clinical questions and self-reported any symptoms associated with COVID-19 or previous diagnosis of COVID-19. A venous blood sample was taken for immunological testing on April 14-15, 2020. Blood samples were tested for the presence of pan-immunoglobulins, IgM, IgA, and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and neutralising antibodies were assessed. We did two successive follow-ups between June 11 and June 13, and between Oct 9 and Dec 5, 2020, at which blood samples were taken.

FINDINGS

Of 4600 households randomly selected, 3599 families (78·2%) with 9702 individuals attended the baseline visit. 9542 individuals from 3556 families had sufficient samples for analyses. 532 (5·6%) of 9542 participants were positive for pan-immunoglobulins against SARS-CoV-2, with a baseline adjusted seroprevalence of 6·92% (95% CI 6·41-7·43) in the population. 437 (82·1%) of 532 participants who were positive for pan-immunoglobulins were asymptomatic. 69 (13·0%) of 532 individuals were positive for IgM antibodies, 84 (15·8%) were positive for IgA antibodies, 532 (100%) were positive for IgG antibodies, and 212 (39·8%) were positive for neutralising antibodies at baseline. The proportion of individuals who were positive for pan-immunoglobulins who had neutralising antibodies in April remained stable for the two follow-up visits (162 [44·6%] of 363 in June, 2020, and 187 [41·2%] of 454 in October-December, 2020). On the basis of data from 335 individuals who attended all three follow-up visits and who were positive for pan-immunoglobulins, neutralising antibody levels did not significantly decrease over the study period (median 1/5·6 [IQR 1/2·0 to 1/14·0] at baseline vs 1/5·6 [1/4·0 to 1/11·2] at first follow-up [p=1·0] and 1/6·3 [1/2·0 to 1/12·6] at second follow-up [p=0·29]). However, neutralising antibody titres were lower in asymptomatic individuals than in confirmed cases and symptomatic individuals. Although titres of IgG decreased over time, the proportion of individuals who had IgG antibodies did not decrease substantially (from 30 [100%] of 30 at baseline to 26 [89·7%] of 29 at second follow-up among confirmed cases, 65 [100%] of 65 at baseline to 58 [92·1%] of 63 at second follow-up among symptomatic individuals, and 437 [100%] of 437 at baseline to 329 [90·9%] of 362 at second follow-up among asymptomatic individuals).

INTERPRETATION

6·92% of a cross-sectional sample of the population of Wuhan developed antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, with 39·8% of this population seroconverting to have neutralising antibodies. Our durability data on humoral responses indicate that mass vaccination is needed to effect herd protection to prevent the resurgence of the epidemic.

FUNDING

Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, National Natural Science Foundation, and Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology.

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Endemic SARS-CoV-2 will maintain post-pandemic immunity

Here, Veldhoen and Simas discuss why immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in populations may ultimately be driven by the endemic presence of the virus and not rely on continued mass vaccination programmes.

Comprehensive analysis of SARS-CoV-2 antibody dynamics in New Zealand

OBJECTIVES

Circulating antibodies are important markers of previous infection and immunity. Questions remain with respect to the durability and functionality of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. This study explored antibody responses in recovered COVID-19 patients in a setting where the probability of re-exposure is effectively nil, owing to New Zealand's successful elimination strategy.

METHODS

A triplex bead-based assay that detects antibody isotype (IgG, IgM and IgA) and subclass (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3 and IgG4) responses against Nucleocapsid (N) protein, the receptor binding domain (RBD) and Spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 was developed. After establishing baseline levels with pre-pandemic control sera (n = 113), samples from PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients with mild-moderate disease (n = 189) collected up to 8 months post-infection were examined. The relationship between antigen-specific antibodies and neutralising antibodies (NAbs) was explored with a surrogate neutralisation assay that quantifies inhibition of the RBD/hACE-2 interaction.

RESULTS

While most individuals had broad isotype and subclass responses to each antigen shortly after infection, only RBD and S protein IgG, as well as NAbs, were relatively stable over the study period, with 99%, 96% and 90% of samples, respectively, having responses over baseline 4-8 months post-infection. Anti-RBD antibodies were strongly correlated with NAbs at all time points (Pearson's r ≥ 0.87), and feasibility of using finger prick sampling to accurately measure anti-RBD IgG was demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 persist for up to 8 months following mild-to-moderate infection. This robust response can be attributed to the initial exposure without immune boosting given the lack of community transmission in our setting.

Long-term persistence of RBD+ memory B cells encoding neutralizing antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 infection

Considerable concerns relating to the duration of protective immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) exist, with evidence of antibody titers declining rapidly after infection and reports of reinfection. Here, we monitor the antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) for up to 6 months after infection. While antibody titers are maintained, ∼13% of the cohort’s neutralizing responses return to background. However, encouragingly, in a selected subset of 13 participants, 12 have detectable RBD-specific memory B cells and these generally are increasing out to 6 months. Furthermore, we are able to generate monoclonal antibodies with SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing capacity from these memory B cells. Overall, our study suggests that the loss of neutralizing antibodies in plasma may be countered by the maintenance of neutralizing capacity in the memory B cell repertoire.

Decay of antibody binding to RBD and spike antigen after 6 months

11 of 81 (13.6%) participants revert to background neutralizing levels

Despite declining antibody titers, robust memory B cell populations are observed

Memory B cells retain potent neutralizing capacity

Persistence of SARS-CoV-2-specific B and T cell responses in convalescent COVID-19 patients 6-8 months after the infection

BACKGROUND

Monitoring the adaptive immune responses during the natural course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection provides useful information for the development of vaccination strategies against this virus and its emerging variants. We thus profiled the serum anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody (Ab) levels and specific memory B and T cell responses in convalescent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

METHODS

A total of 119 samples from 88 convalescent donors who experienced mild to critical disease were tested for the presence of elevated anti-spike and anti-receptor binding domain Ab levels over a period of 8 months. In addition, the levels of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing Abs and specific memory B and T cell responses were tested in a subset of samples.

FINDINGS

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Abs were present in 85% of the samples collected within 4 weeks after the onset of symptoms in COVID-19 patients. Levels of specific immunoglobulin M (IgM)/IgA Abs declined after 1 month, while levels of specific IgG Abs and plasma neutralizing activities remained relatively stable up to 6 months after diagnosis. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Abs were still present, although at a significantly lower level, in 80% of the samples collected at 6-8 months after symptom onset. SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B and T cell responses developed with time and were persistent in all of the patients followed up for 6-8 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that protective adaptive immunity following natural infection of SARS-CoV-2 may persist for at least 6-8 months, regardless of disease severity. Development of medium- or long-term protective immunity through vaccination may thus be possible.

FUNDING

This project was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (ATAC, no. 101003650), the Italian Ministry of Health (Ricerca Finalizzata grant no. GR-2013-02358399), the Center for Innovative Medicine, and the Swedish Research Council. J.A. was supported by the SciLifeLab/KAW national COVID-19 research program project grant 2020.

SARS-CoV-2 seroassay optimization and performance in a population with high background reactivity in Mali

Serological tests are an indispensable tool to understand the epidemiology of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, particularly in areas where molecular diagnostics are limited. Poor assay performance may hinder the utility of these tests, including high rates of false-positivity previously reported in sub-Saharan Africa. From 312 Malian samples collected prior to 2020, we measured antibodies to the commonly tested SARS-CoV-2 antigens and four other betacoronaviruses by ELISA, and assessed functional cross-reactivity in a subset by SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assay. We then evaluated the performance of an ELISA developed in the US, using two-antigen SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and receptor-binding domain. To optimize test performance, we compared single and two-antigen approaches using existing assay cutoffs and population-specific cutoffs for Malian control samples (positive and negative). Background reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 antigens was common in pre-pandemic samples compared to US controls (43.4% (135/311) for spike protein, 22.8% (71/312) for RBD, and 33.9% (79/233) for nucleocapsid protein). SARS-CoV-2 reactivity correlated weakly with other betacoronavirus reactivity, varied between Malian communities, and increased with age. No pre-pandemic samples demonstrated functional activity. Regardless of the cutoffs applied, specificity improved using a two-antigen approach. Test performance was optimal using a two-antigen assay with population-specific cutoffs derived from ROC curve analysis [Sensitivity: 73.9% (51.6-89.8), Specificity: 99.4% (97.7-99.9)]. In the setting of high background reactivity, such as sub-Saharan Africa, SARS-CoV-2 serological assays need careful qualification is to characterize the epidemiology of disease, prevent unnecessary harm, and allocate resources for targeted control measures.

SARS-CoV-2 Serology Status Detected by Commercialized Platforms Distinguishes Previous Infection and Vaccination Adaptive Immune Responses

Background

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected over 110 million individuals and led to 2.5 million deaths worldwide. As more individuals are vaccinated, the clinical performance and utility of SARS-CoV-2 serology platforms needs to be evaluated.

Methods

The ability of four commercial SARS-CoV-2 serology platforms to detect previous infection or vaccination were evaluated using a cohort of 53 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive patients, 89 SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated healthcare workers (Pfizer or Moderna), and 127 SARS-CoV-2 negative patients. Serology results were compared to a cell based SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus (PSV) neutralizing antibodies assay.

Results

The Roche S-(spike) antibody and Diazyme neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) assays detected adaptive immune response in 100.0% and 90.1% of vaccinated individuals who received two-doses of vaccine (initial and booster), respectively. The Roche N-(nucleocapsid) antibody assay and Diazyme IgG assay did not detect adaptive immune response in vaccinated individuals. The Diazyme Nabs assay correlated with the PSV SARS-CoV-2 ID50 neutralization titers (R2= 0.70), while correlation of the Roche S-antibody assay was weaker (R2= 0.39). Median PSV SARS-CoV-2 ID50 titers more than doubled in vaccinated individuals who received two-doses of the Moderna vaccine (ID50: 597) compared to individuals that received a single dose (ID50: 284).

Conclusions

The Roche S-antibody and Diazyme NAbs assays robustly detected adaptive immune responses in SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated individuals and SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. The Diazyme NAbs assay strongly correlates with the PSV SARS-CoV-2 NAbs in vaccinated individuals. Understanding the reactivity of commercially available serology platforms is important when distinguishing vaccination response versus natural infection.

Mini Review Immunological Consequences of Immunization With COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Preliminary Results

Background: BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 are the two recently approved mRNA-based vaccines against COVID-19 which has shown excellent safety and efficacy. Preliminary data about specific and neutralizing antibodies is available covering the first 100 days after vaccination. Methods: We reviewed all the publications regarding the immunologic consequences of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccination. A summary of specific antibodies concentration and neutralizing antibodies titers elicited by each vaccine is provided. Results: BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 displayed a reassuring safety and efficacy profile, with the latter above 94%. They can elicit specific antibodies titers and neutralizing antibodies concentrations that are far superior from those observed among COVID-19 human convalescent serum, across a wide span of age, for at least 100 days after vaccination. Moreover, the vaccine-induced T cellular response is oriented toward a TH1 response and no evidence of vaccine-enhanced disease have been reported. Discussion: BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 can elicit specific antibodies titers and neutralizing antibodies concentrations above those observed among COVID-19 human convalescent serum in the first 100 days after vaccination. Data about vaccine efficacy in those with previous COVID-19 or immunocompromised is still limited.

Immune Memory in Mild COVID-19 Patients and Unexposed Donors Reveals Persistent T Cell Responses After SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Understanding the causes of the diverse outcome of COVID-19 pandemic in different geographical locations is important for the worldwide vaccine implementation and pandemic control responses. We analyzed 42 unexposed healthy donors and 28 mild COVID-19 subjects up to 5 months from the recovery for SARS-CoV-2 specific immunological memory. Using HLA class II predicted peptide megapools, we identified SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive CD4⁺ T cells in around 66% of the unexposed individuals. Moreover, we found detectable immune memory in mild COVID-19 patients several months after recovery in the crucial arms of protective adaptive immunity; CD4⁺ T cells and B cells, with a minimal contribution from CD8⁺ T cells. Interestingly, the persistent immune memory in COVID-19 patients is predominantly targeted towards the Spike glycoprotein of the SARS-CoV-2. This study provides the evidence of both high magnitude pre-existing and persistent immune memory in Indian population. By providing the knowledge on cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2, our work has implication for the development and implementation of vaccines against COVID-19.

Potent neutralizing nanobodies resist convergent circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2 by targeting novel and conserved epitopes

There is an urgent need to develop effective interventions resistant to the evolving variants of SARS-CoV-2. Nanobodies (Nbs) are stable and cost-effective agents that can be delivered by novel aerosolization route to treat SARS-CoV-2 infections efficiently. However, it remains unknown if they possess broadly neutralizing activities against the prevalent circulating strains. We found that potent neutralizing Nbs are highly resistant to the convergent variants of concern that evade a large panel of neutralizing antibodies (Abs) and significantly reduce the activities of convalescent or vaccine-elicited sera. Subsequent determination of 9 high-resolution structures involving 6 potent neutralizing Nbs by cryoelectron microscopy reveals conserved and novel epitopes on virus spike inaccessible to Abs. Systematic structural comparison of neutralizing Abs and Nbs provides critical insights into how Nbs uniquely target the spike to achieve high-affinity and broadly neutralizing activity against the evolving virus. Our study will inform the rational design of novel pan-coronavirus vaccines and therapeutics.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Serology persistence over time in COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Donors

Background

Characterizing the kinetics of the antibody response to SARS□CoV□2 is of critical importance to developing strategies that may mitigate the public health burden of COVID-19. We sought to determine how circulating antibody levels change over time following natural infection.

Methods/Materials

We conducted a prospective, longitudinal analysis of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) donors at multiple time points over a 9-month period. At each study visit, subjects either donated plasma or only had study samples drawn. In all cases, anti-SARS-CoV-2 donor testing was performed using semi-quantitative chemiluminescent immunoassays (ChLIA) targeting subunit 1 (S1) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein, and an in-house fluorescence reduction neutralization assay (FRNA).

Results

From April to November 2020 we enrolled 202 donors, mean age 47.3 ±14.7 years, 55% female, 75% Caucasian. Most donors reported a mild clinical course (91%, n=171) without hospitalization. One hundred and five (105) (52%) donors presented for repeat visits with a median 42 (12-163) days between visits. The final visit occurred at a median 160 (53-273) days post-symptom resolution. Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (Ab), SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG and neutralizing antibodies were detected in 97.5%, 91.1%, and 74% of donors respectively at initial presentation. Neutralizing Ab titers based on FRNA ₅₀ were positively associated with mean IgG levels (p = <0.0001). Mean IgG levels and neutralizing titers were positively associated with COVID-19 severity, increased donor age and BMI (p=0.0006 and p=0.0028, p=0.0083 and p=0.0363, (p=0.0008 and p=0.0018, respectively). Over the course of repeat visits, IgG decreased in 74.1% of donors; FRNA ₅₀ decreased in 44.4% and remained unchanged in 33.3% of repeat donors. A weak negative correlation was observed between total Ab levels and number of days post-symptom recovery (r = 0.09).

Conclusion

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were identified in 97% of convalescent donors at initial presentation. In a cohort that largely did not require hospitalization. IgG and neutralizing antibodies were positively correlated with age, BMI and clinical severity, and persisted for up to 9 months post-recovery from natural infection. On repeat presentation, IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 levels decreased in 56% of repeat donors. Overall, these data suggest that CP donors possess a wide range of IgG and neutralizing antibody levels that are proportionally distributed across demographics, with the exception of age, BMI and clinical severity.

Correlates of Vaccine-Induced Protection against SARS-CoV-2

We are in the midst of a pandemic caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SARS-CoV-2 has caused more than two million deaths after one year of the pandemic. The world is experiencing a deep economic recession. Safe and effective vaccines are needed to prevent further morbidity and mortality. Vaccine candidates against COVID-19 have been developed at an unprecedented speed, with more than 200 vaccine candidates currently under investigation. Among those, 20 candidates have entered the clinical Phase 3 to evaluate efficacy, and three have been approved by the European Medicines Agency. The aim of immunization is to act against infection, disease and/or transmission. However, the measurement of vaccine efficacy is challenging, as efficacy trials need to include large cohorts with verum and placebo cohorts. In the future, this will be even more challenging as further vaccine candidates will receive approval, an increasing number of humans will receive vaccinations and incidence might decrease. To evaluate novel and second-generation vaccine candidates, randomized placebo-controlled trials might not be appropriate anymore. Correlates of protection (CoP) could be an important tool to evaluate novel vaccine candidates, but vaccine-induced CoP have not been clearly defined for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. In this review, we report on immunogenicity against natural SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine-induced immune responses and discuss immunological markers that can be linked to protection. By discussing the immunogenicity and efficacy of forerunner vaccines, we aim to give a comprehensive overview of possible efficacy measures and CoP.

Importance of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy in older age groups

Importance

An effective vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 will reduce morbidity and mortality and allow substantial relaxation of physical distancing policies. However, the ability of a vaccine to prevent infection or disease depends critically on protecting older individuals, who are at highest risk of severe disease.

Objective

We quantitatively estimated the relative benefits of COVID-19 vaccines, in terms of preventing infection and death, with a particular focus on effectiveness in elderly people.

Design

We applied compartmental mathematical modelling to determine the relative effects of vaccines that block infection and onward transmission, and those that prevent severe disease. We assumed that vaccines showing high efficacy in adults would be deployed, and examined the effects of lower vaccine efficacy among the elderly population.

Setting and participants

Our mathematical model was calibrated to simulate the course of an epidemic among the entire population of British Columbia, Canada. Within our model, the population was structured by age and levels of contact.

Main outcome(s) and measure(s)

We assessed the effectiveness of possible vaccines in terms of the predicted number of infections within the entire population, and deaths among people aged 65 years and over.

Results

 In order to reduce the overall rate of infections in the population, high rates of deployment to all age groups will be critical. However, to substantially reduce mortality among people aged 65 years and over, a vaccine must directly protect a high proportion of people in that group.

Conclusions and relevance

Effective vaccines deployed to a large fraction of the population are projected to substantially reduce infection in an otherwise susceptible population. However, even if transmission were blocked highly effectively by vaccination of children and younger adults, overall mortality would not be substantially reduced unless the vaccine is also directly protective in elderly people. We strongly recommend: (i) the inclusion of people aged 65 years and over in future trials of COVID-19 vaccine candidates; (ii) careful monitoring of vaccine efficacy in older age groups following vaccination.